It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Gravity explained with magnetic force (picture)

page: 4
6
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 07:11 PM

Are you trying to tell that glass cannot be attracted to anything?

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:29 AM

originally posted by: boomstick88

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: boomstick88
Magnetoelectric universe. Gravity does repel, at least here on earth: Hydrogen and Helium are prime examples.

How exactly are Hydrogen and Helium prime examples of gravity repelling?

S block elements, only s block elements, limited amount of orbits, frequency of magneto electric force is not fast enough to attracted it here, everything else is attracted.
Im getting really close

Ok, I'll try the question again since you weren't even close.

How exactly are Hydrogen and Helium prime examples of gravity repelling?

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:31 AM

If I release drop of water and 20 ton iron weight side by side, both will touch down Moons surface at the same moment, acceleration rate is the same for both objects regardless ...

But you do realize that the "Force" acting on these two objects is dramatically different, right?

I think gravity 'works' by changing shape of an object (water drop) by changing shape of volume an object occupies geometrically in a run away fashion.

Well, yes it does change the shape, but not the volume (or the mass). This has been known for quite a while. As an object gets closer to a large gravitational mass such as a black hole, the gravitational force acting on the near side of the object is considerably greater than the gravitational forces acting on the far side of the same object, and the object will elongate as a result. This is known as 'spaghettification'.
edit on 2/9/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:01 AM

But you do realize that the "Force" acting on these two objects is dramatically different, right?

What 'force'? Gravitational effect is not a force.

Well, yes it does change the shape, but not the volume (or the mass). This has been known for quite a while.

I was not talking of the volume of the object. It is the same all the way. The volume I was referring to is the volume of space OCCUPIED by the object. Since object occupies all of allocated space volume and that volume shape is changed, the object must also change it's shape (only shape, volume is the same).
Object exists within space volume and that space volume is subject to distortion. When volume which object occupies changes it shape, the object 'follows' changing its own shape accordingly. If there are no object inside gravity affected area, that area is still distorted.

Any object can be described by dimension points on xyz coordinate system. When space (coordinate system) is affected by gravity, the physical object is also affected. Volume is a place holder for physical object. Hope I clarified things a little.

Anyway. So why water drop and 20 ton iron ball accelerate toward Moon surface at the same rate (given initial speed was zero for both)?

Thank you.

edit on 9-2-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:10 AM
just a question:

What would be a shape of water drop if released to Moon surface, say from 100 meters? Would it be the shape of usual water drop here on Earth, would it be round all the way, or it will be in a shape opposite of 'usual', with 'tail' pointing toward gravity source?

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 10:57 AM
Two elements that escaping earth "gravity". Why, because they are lighter or repelling?

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:48 PM

I think people have grown so accustomed to correcting others that many have lost the ability to just.. talk in outlandish ways.

Are you correct on your proposition according to what we currently "know?" Well, no, probably not.. but talking about these things, in this way, can be equal parts enjoyable and valuable.

I also think that exploring complex concepts in the most basic, elementary way can be fun and insightful even if its far from comprehensive. I'm a blasphemer though, I believe insight and progress in these realms are not exclusive to science/scientists (even if the field is the one that will put it to use and expand our understanding).

One of the ways I like to imagine gravity is like water circling a drain. On a large enough scale, at a certain rate, items would be sucked in along with the water appearring to "magically" he pulled down by the surrounding environment itself.

Of course, with gravity, it would be more of a membrane than a drain and more dispersed than the drain. But hey, to me even going that far in correction takes away a bit from how it might be interpreted by others.

No matter how advanced ones knowledge may be (and lets be honest, for most, it doesn't extend beyond Google), I strongly encourage not only "thought experiments" at every level but also revisiting even the most basic educational resources. The amount is insights I've had from re-reading electronics 101 resources never ceases to amaze me!

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:21 PM
I don't even speculate why mass is causing space fabric to stretch around it. I am concerned with effect of gravity mostly.

Standard Model forces are what maintain stable states of matter (physical body composure). ''Stable state' can also be described from geometrical point of view, where geometrical composure also represents sort of 'stable state' that expresses itself in a way of 'geometrical form'. If I am to stretch rubber sheet, it will resist in attempt to assume original stable state. But instead of doing it stretching with my hands, imagine space where rubber sheet is stretched because spatial coordinates of it assumed new set of values, changing the shape of available space.

Sure, physical body will find equilibrium quickly if space volume deforms. The trick is that gravity is gradient. As soon as new 'stable state' is attained, geometry of space will also change a tad. And with each attempt to reach new equilibrium object's geometry will change again -- it will become a run away process, viewed as gravitational acceleration by observer.

This way it does not matter, how much an object in my Moon experiment weights or made of. Water drop and iron ball in this scenario are 'unaware' of being in accelerated motion. Both simply comply with new geometry.

There)))
edit on 9-2-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:44 PM
to OP

Hi,
cool picture. I think red flag for me was that the guy in his lab set up used three equal size objects. That's not fair)))
And I think he 'discovered' probably some pretty trivial event, but he put his twist to it.

edit on 9-2-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 09:39 AM
Gravity is "order".

Antigravity is chaos (omnipresence).

Whatever supposedly causes order, the property which entropy dispells (return to omnipresence).

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 12:19 AM

As the atmosphere is negligible on the moon, the drop would take on the shape of the lowest energy which is spherical, and it would fall in that shape at the same speed as other objects near the moon's surface.
edit on 14-2-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 03:42 AM

You seem to be describing some kind of curved space model.

In general relativity free-fall acceleration arises from curved spacetime. It would not work if only space was deformed. Locally a free-falling object is at rest, there are no forces acting on it.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 03:58 AM

originally posted by: boomstick88

Are you trying to tell that glass cannot be attracted to anything?

Glass can be very effective at holding a static charge . It's poor interactions wit magnetic fields makes it a great storage device. And then there is always the attraction of mass to take into account. Ever wonder why dust settles everywhere and just not on your floor??

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 04:00 AM

originally posted by: moebius

You seem to be describing some kind of curved space model.

In general relativity free-fall acceleration arises from curved spacetime. It would not work if only space was deformed. Locally a free-falling object is at rest, there are no forces acting on it.

Couldn't have said it better myself an object in free fall has no force acting on it. In fact if your in free fall without a frame of refrence you couldn't tell if you dived out a plane or were in the middle of space you couldn't tell.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 09:46 AM

originally posted by: moebius

You seem to be describing some kind of curved space model.

In general relativity free-fall acceleration arises from curved spacetime. It would not work if only space was deformed. Locally a free-falling object is at rest, there are no forces acting on it.

You say there will be no free fall if only space was deformed? What 'forces' are you talking about. Gravity is not a 'force'.

Drop an apple to the ground and see what happens. Last note: you said "..free-fall acceleration arises from curved space-time".
Yes. But HOW does that happen? You seem explaining gravity using gravity)))

Free fall is there only because of curved space-time. Nothing else. It does not matter if I drop an apple to the ground or discuss Moon's orbit. Who is at rest is not important in my example...in fact free falling object is not 'aware' so to speak of being in motion when inside gravity affected area like Moon's.
Apple that I drop is set to motion without any external input (push). Just to say it is because of curved space-time does not explain apple falling.

If gravity was 'force' then acceleration rate would be different for objects with different mass, which is not the case.

Put aside relativity for now...Feather and a hammer touch down Moon's surface at the same time. This fact is counter intuitive but still a hard fact. How do you explain it?

cheers)
edit on 14-2-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 10:17 AM

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: moebius

You seem to be describing some kind of curved space model.

In general relativity free-fall acceleration arises from curved spacetime. It would not work if only space was deformed. Locally a free-falling object is at rest, there are no forces acting on it.

Couldn't have said it better myself an object in free fall has no force acting on it. In fact if your in free fall without a frame of refrence you couldn't tell if you dived out a plane or were in the middle of space you couldn't tell.

True. But it is not what I intent to discuss.. and it does not answer the question why apple is falling to the ground. Just to state it is because of curvature is not enough, to me at least. There has to be a 'mechanism' behind it.
edit on 14-2-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 01:54 PM

originally posted by: greenreflections

originally posted by: moebius

You seem to be describing some kind of curved space model.

In general relativity free-fall acceleration arises from curved spacetime. It would not work if only space was deformed. Locally a free-falling object is at rest, there are no forces acting on it.

You say there will be no free fall if only space was deformed? What 'forces' are you talking about. Gravity is not a 'force'.

Drop an apple to the ground and see what happens. Last note: you said "..free-fall acceleration arises from curved space-time".
Yes. But HOW does that happen? You seem explaining gravity using gravity)))

Free fall is there only because of curved space-time. Nothing else. It does not matter if I drop an apple to the ground or discuss Moon's orbit. Who is at rest is not important in my example...in fact free falling object is not 'aware' so to speak of being in motion when inside gravity affected area like Moon's.
Apple that I drop is set to motion without any external input (push). Just to say it is because of curved space-time does not explain apple falling.

If gravity was 'force' then acceleration rate would be different for objects with different mass, which is not the case.

Put aside relativity for now...Feather and a hammer touch down Moon's surface at the same time. This fact is counter intuitive but still a hard fact. How do you explain it?

cheers)

In your model you are talking about "physical body will find equilibrium quickly if space volume deforms" a "gradient" and change of state. Which sounds to me like some kind of tidal force mechanism.

Think of a point-like object (volume -> 0). How will it behave in your model when being at rest? Where would the acceleration come from?

In GR the space and time are curved. One way to visualize this effect is to imagine the time axis of your test object being tilted towards the mass (to be more correct the lightcone is tilted and stretched). The tilt is what makes local motion through time (being at rest) into global accelerated motion towards the mass.

posted on Feb, 15 2017 @ 06:57 PM

In your model you are talking about "physical body will find equilibrium quickly if space volume deforms" a "gradient" and change of state. Which sounds to me like some kind of tidal force mechanism.

But it is! What is 'tidal force'? Metric of coordinate system xyz inside gravity affected area will show distance to the next marking being further out from the marking from previous marking on same axis at infinite positive delta value. It is gradient.

Now, I picture a rubber ball, real physical object, say 2 meters in diameter, somewhere in interstellar space. It is perfectly round. As I move it into Moon's gravity affected space area, infinite positive delta metric value will change rubber ball shape, because available space and coordinate readings at any point within rubber ball are telling the ball to assume new, different from 'perfect round' shape.

Object exists inside space-time in this case and if deformation of space geometrically occurs, an object will assume that new geometrical reality, but rubber ball because of QM forces tends to return it being round again. It cannot because the gradient never lets it to. As soon as new 'round shape' achieved, 'nose' of the object already a little bit further. To the outside observer rubber ball will look to me like accelerating toward Moon's surface.

cheers)

posted on Feb, 15 2017 @ 07:50 PM

Im not following.

Why would gravitational effect not increase/decrease by altering the presence of electrons in the environment?

posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 04:44 AM

originally posted by: boomstick88
Two elements that escaping earth "gravity". Why, because they are lighter or repelling?

They don't escape earth's gravity though.

top topics

6